Legal Opinion

Hill v. Thixton

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided February 23, 1893PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Case 14 — .PETITION ORDINARY — .•As the payees -of. the note sued on were peddlers, and had not taken out license as required by law, there can .be no recovery on the note. (Rash v. Holloway, 82 Xy., 674; Rash v. Farley, 12 Xy. Law Rep., 913.1 If the plaintiffs in the purchase of the note relied upon the statement* in the certificates, they operate to estop the defendant from relying upon the defense of want of consideration and fraud in procuring- the note.

Read the full summary

Case 14 — .PETITION ORDINARY — .•As the payees -of. the note sued on were peddlers, and had not taken out license as required by law, there can .be no recovery on the note. (Rash v. Holloway, 82 Xy., 674; Rash v. Farley, 12 Xy. Law Rep., 913.1 If the plaintiffs in the purchase of the note relied upon the statement* in the certificates, they operate to estop the defendant from relying upon the defense of want of consideration and fraud in procuring- the note. (Crahtree v. Atchison, 13 Ky. Law Rep., 321; Wells v. Lewis, 4 Met., 270; Rudd v. Matthews, 79 Ky., 486.) ■Cited: Jaqua v. Montgomery…

1Opinion of the Court

-JHDGE HAZELRIGG

delivered the opinion of the court.

In the summer of 1888 Hill, the appellant, who was a timid and unlettered man, was visited by a stranger, who induced his assistance toward starting his lightning-rod enterprise in the neighborhood by obtaining a promise to let-him rod his house, assuring him that :it would cost him only four dollars. In a few days some four other strangers appeared, and proceeded to decorate his humble shanty with the most improved lightning conductors “known to science.” After completing the job they asked him to sign some papers which they 'called…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Crabtree v. AtchisonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1892
  2. Jaqua v. MontgomeryIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
  3. Wells v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Meyer v. Guardian Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
  2. Smith v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1937
  3. Guardian Trust Co. v. MeyerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1927
  4. Anglo-American Mill Co. v. Kentucky Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  5. Bates v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API